Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Major Herbert Rouse Armstrong

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Major Herbert Rouse Armstrong

    How come Armstrong was able to use arsenic in its pure form in the chocolates, when arsenic purchased at the chemist in the twenties had to have charcoal or indigo in it to prevent it being mistaken for sugar or salt?

    PS: Why have I been reduced to the rank of 'Cadet'? Is it because I have not contributed to the forum for some time. Bit severe!!!!!
    'Nothing is obvious'.

  • #2
    Hi Granger the cadet,

    I know a little about this case but was it determined that the poison was uncolored? It was white in the movie as I recall but that isn't to be taken as gospel. In chocolate or scones, I don't think it would matter much. Since arsenic is a metal, I assume it was in a salt form from the chemist's so it would be soluble. I don't know so I'm just asking.
    This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

    Stan Reid

    Comment


    • #3
      I've read about this case and it's fascinating. Armstrong and all his little packets of arsenic ready to hit the dandelions on his lawn. His opposition lawyer becoming so ill after tea and scones with Armstrong. His nagging, oppressive wife after a stint in an asylum dying.
      As you do.
      http://oznewsandviews.proboards.com

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi Stan: See your still an inspector!!

        I am reading Robin O'Dell's 'Exhumation Of A murder', and more than once is it mentioned that there was white powder in the chocolates. The business about the colouring of the arsenic is in the book, but so far no explanation as to how Armstrong got the white powder, but his local chemist definitely sold him coloured arsenic for his dandelions.

        There is a new book just out arguing a good case that Armstrong did not murder his wife or attempt to kill the rival solicitor.

        This really is a good murder, and well under rated. I can only find one pic iof Armstrong,and none of the other leading characters.
        'Nothing is obvious'.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks Granger. A book I have called World Encyclopedia of 20th Century Murder has a pic of Armstrong with his [B]wife[/B. It appears to be in their younger years.
          This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

          Stan Reid

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Stan

            Any chance of getting the pic onto this thread? If not could you e-mail direct. Only picture I hyave seen is Armstrong in the magistrates dock (shades of Crippen). Picture was taken by a solicitor, and there was quite a rumpus in the court when he took the picture. In the UIK, in 1921, pictures in court were not exactly illegal, but frowned upon.
            'Nothing is obvious'.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Granger,

              It's possible at some later date but right now I don't have a flat scanner or copier. The book is by Jay Robert Nash so perhaps you can find it in your library. I would expect that the pic is on the internet somewhere but perhaps not.
              This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

              Stan Reid

              Comment


              • #8
                I also have Robin Odell;s excellent book Exhumation of Murder. There are many photos of Armstrong and family in it.
                Many people are in denial that their relations were murderers and wish to prove the opposite.
                In the mid 1990s Martin Beales, a solicitor working in Hay on Wye convinced Margaret Armstrong, one of the daughters of Armstrong that he was innocent. She had led a terrible life after his death,
                Beales wrote a very unconvincing book, called Dead not Buried, trying to frame Oswald Martin and his father in law pub in 1995
                Everything about Armstrong, his ego, his secret life, his lies,his persistence, plus his motive, circumstances and opportunity point to the classic poisoner profile. He was an amoral conceited little man, who thought he was above the law.
                Odell's book is a great overview of the case.
                Miss Marple

                Comment


                • #9
                  Miss Marple:

                  That's interesting. My copy of 'Exhumation Of Murder' was from the library, and they tracked down a large print, which has no pictures, which I did think was odd, although having said that I have also just read a niormal print 'The Burning Of Evelyn Foster', and other than a couple of maps, this book also had no pictures. which is so frustrating, as I have yet to find any pixs of Miss Foster either..

                  Stan:

                  Will try and get that book. I have scoured the net for a picture of Armstrong, and just found the one I mentioned.
                  'Nothing is obvious'.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I've seen 2 photos of Armstrong. One of his wedding day with Katherine and one of him with a hat and a flower in his lapel which I think is from the early 1920's. Not sure. The books you mention I've never seen but I'd be interested in publishers. Like to read them.
                    http://oznewsandviews.proboards.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      That may be the wedding day photo I have in my book.

                      I read The Burning of Evelyn Foster many years ago and there was a picture of her burned car on the dust cover. It was a very interesting work but no other pictures.
                      This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

                      Stan Reid

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This the only one I have seen of WRA. As I said, apparently taken by a solicitor, which interrupted the magistrate's proceedings.

                        How can I make the pix bigger? (for future reference)?
                        Attached Files
                        'Nothing is obvious'.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X